9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 129Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #1 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 08:43 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,007
9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Judge Robart claimed there were no terrorist attacks by refugees from any of the 7 countries on Obama's & Trump's temporary ban list since 9/11, but Byron York revealed that is not the case. source

Excerpt:
The Justice Department provided the subcommittee with a list of 580 people who were convicted — not just arrested, but tried and convicted — of terror-related offenses between Sept. 11, 2001 and Dec. 31, 2014.

The subcommittee investigated further and found that at least 380 of the 580 were foreign-born and that an additional 129 were of unknown origin. Of the 380, there were representatives — at least 60 — from all of the countries on the Trump executive order list. And with 129 unknowns, there might be more, as well.

In addition, since the Senate list was compiled, there have been others involved in terrorism in the United States from the seven countries. One highly-publicized example was the case of Abdul Artan, a Somali refugee who last November wounded 11 people with a machete during an attack on the campus of Ohio State University. In fairness to Judge Robart, Artan was shot and killed by police — not arrested — so perhaps the judge didn't count him.


---------------------------------

This judge made himself national security expert, and, with his pro bono work for refugees, halted President Trump's ban.

Today, the Appeals Court has also uphold that halt to the ban. In the time that the temporary ban was halted, 100 Syrian refugees have come into the United States.

I have to wonder: when (not "if") the next terrorist attack happens in the United States, will the people who cheered for these rulings blame these judges, or will they blame President Trump?




I'm just going to leave this here.




Last edited by becareful2; 02-09-2017 at 08:52 PM.
becareful2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 09:28 PM
Member
 
23cm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: The South
Posts: 70
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

There's a reason it's called the Ninth Circus Court Of Appeals. Most liberal court in the nation and the one most often overturned.
23cm is offline  
post #3 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 10:35 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,419
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

john117 is offline  
 
post #4 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 10:39 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,673
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by becareful2 View Post
This judge made himself national security expert, and, with his pro bono work for refugees, halted President Trump's ban.
I want to comment on this sentence right here. There is a bunch of implications while ignoring "status quo".

First, I find it ironic you are demonizing this judge by stating that he made himself a "national security expert", but that is exactly what Trump did early on with very little knowledge of any of this. Trump claimed he was smarter than our generals. So, while it will be tough to tell whether this judge is right or wrong with respect to what keeps us safe, to use what's trump has done against Trump as a negative is mind boggling to me.

Second, this judge didn't make him a "National Security Expert". What he did was believe that the president, who claims to be one, isn't one either. The judge didn't enact any laws or somehow rewrite any guidelines. He just put a stay on an executive order that brought our National Security back to what it was prior, or status quo. Had this judge removed some countries off of the list and somehow added different ones, then I could see your argument. All he did was say, "yeah, no, we are stopping this and going back to what was".
Herschel is offline  
post #5 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 11:04 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,953
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

I am more concerned over the unthinking knee jerk reaction that prompted the ban in the first place. Let's see, from the OP's own source there were 580 convicted of "terrorism related activity" of which at least 60 were from the seven countries named in the ban, So over a 13 year period 580 people were convicted, not of terrorism, but the more nebulous term "terrorist related activities" IOW approximately 45 a year in total out of approximately 14,000,000 new immigrants into the country over that period of time, or about 0.0004 percent. But again of that total only 60 or about 5 per year from those countries. And again remember they were not convicted of terrorism, but of "terrorist related activities" which could mean anything from sending money to your uncle in the old country who is himself only suspected of being a terrorist or actually being engaged in some other activity broadly described as supporting terrorism.
Never mind the other telling signs only 380 out of the 580 were immigrants in the first place and they don't even know where 129 of the remaining 200 were from. Oh well, we can never be too safe.

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is online now  
post #6 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 11:04 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,007
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herschel View Post
I want to comment on this sentence right here. There is a bunch of implications while ignoring "status quo".

First, I find it ironic you are demonizing this judge by stating that he made himself a "national security expert", but that is exactly what Trump did early on with very little knowledge of any of this. Trump claimed he was smarter than our generals. So, while it will be tough to tell whether this judge is right or wrong with respect to what keeps us safe, to use what's trump has done against Trump as a negative is mind boggling to me.

Second, this judge didn't make him a "National Security Expert". What he did was believe that the president, who claims to be one, isn't one either. The judge didn't enact any laws or somehow rewrite any guidelines. He just put a stay on an executive order that brought our National Security back to what it was prior, or status quo. Had this judge removed some countries off of the list and somehow added different ones, then I could see your argument. All he did was say, "yeah, no, we are stopping this and going back to what was".
The judge made his ruling based on false info and passed it off as fact. He was no national security expert so why base a ruling on knowledge that he didn't have? Did he bother to ask the DOJ for those stats? No, and if he was paying attention to the news, he would have known about the Somali who attacked those people at OSU. His ruling was not only based on false information but it was based on emotion as well, given that he has a soft spot in his heart for refugees.

Trump ran on many campaign promises, and he's been making good on several of them. Yes, he was wrong for saying he knew more than the generals but any person knows that statement was more bravado than factual. Now, as president, he has access to intel that the judge does not. He knows things that he cannot say, and given that his powers as POTUS include the ability to ban anyone from anywhere who poses a threat to this country, for however long, are spelled out in the Constitution, what legal grounds did this judge have to halt the ban while the Trump admin work to implement a better vetting process? Why no lawsuits, protests, and court reversals when Obama and Carter did it?

Yes, this country is made of immigrants, but that's not the issue that the anti-Trump people insist for being the motive behind Trump's EO. It is an undisputed fact that there are ISIS terrorists among the refugee population that have come into western countries, and it should be common sense to delay the processing of those entries from those countries that do not have a proper vetting system in place until we can set up something better than letting the U.N. handle it.

If there is even one terrorist among the one hundred Syrian refugees who were allowed in during this halt to the temporary ban, will you blame Trump for it or will you blame the judges for their emotion-based rulings?
becareful2 is offline  
post #7 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 11:08 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,007
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
I am more concerned over the unthinking knee jerk reaction that prompted the ban in the first place. Let's see, from the OP's own source there were 580 convicted of "terrorism related activity" of which at least 60 were from the seven countries named in the ban, So over a 13 year period 580 people were convicted, not of terrorism, but the more nebulous term "terrorist related activities" IOW approximately 45 a year in total out of approximately 14,000,000 new immigrants into the country over that period of time, or about 0.0004 percent. But again of that total only 60 or about 5 per year from those countries. And again remember they were not convicted of terrorism, but of "terrorist related activities" which could mean anything from sending money to your uncle in the old country who is himself only suspected of being a terrorist or actually being engaged in some other activity broadly described as supporting terrorism.
Never mind the other telling signs only 380 out of the 580 were immigrants in the first place and they don't even know where 129 of the remaining 200 were from. Oh well, we can never be too safe.
I don't think the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were convicted, either. They certainly committed "terrorist related activities" and were never properly tried & convicted.
becareful2 is offline  
post #8 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 11:14 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,953
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by becareful2 View Post
I don't think the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were convicted, either. They certainly committed "terrorist related activities" and were never properly tried & convicted. The group of men who tried to blow up that bridge in Ohio were also convicted of "terrorist related activities" but we're just parsing words here.
And not a single one of the 9/11 hijackers were from a country named in the ban. And if your talking about the three guys who plotted to blow up the bridge in Ohio - well, those guys were home grown. So should we ban travelers from Cleveland as well? But then, we are just parsing words here again. Read the excerpt you posted in your OP and think about the small numbers and small chances that this ban would do. If nothing else it was just something to placate a bunch of kool aid drinkers who won't take the time to look at factual data.

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is online now  
post #9 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-09-2017, 11:20 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,007
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot View Post
And not a single one of the 9/11 hijackers were from a country named in the ban. And if your talking about the three guys who plotted to blow up the bridge in Ohio - well, those guys were home grown. So should we ban travelers from Cleveland as well? But then, we are just parsing words here again. Read the excerpt you posted in your OP and think about the small numbers and small chances that this ban would do. If nothing else it was just something to placate a bunch of kool aid drinkers who won't take the time to look at factual data.
Yes, I just remembered that the Ohio bridge plotters were home grown, so I deleted that part. But back to the DOJ stat, even if the numbers are small, how many people do you think it would take to commit a mass terrorist attack? Are you willing to make that call on behalf of 300 million people? Your job description is clearly spelled out in the Constitution, so would you just ignore it and continue, as Obama did, to let Muslim refugees in who may be ISIS members?
becareful2 is offline  
post #10 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 02:32 AM
Forum Supporter
 
arbitrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Central Texas/Brazos Valley
Posts: 11,344
Cool Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

What is Byron York's claim to fame, his experience level, and exactly what are his academic literary credentials?

Greatly wondering if he is, in any way, some kind of a "Steve Bannon stooge!"



"To love another person is to see the face of God!" - Jean Valjean from Les Miserables

My Story! http://talkaboutmarriage.com/going-t...andonment.html
arbitrator is offline  
post #11 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:10 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,953
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by becareful2 View Post
Yes, I just remembered that the Ohio bridge plotters were home grown, so I deleted that part. But back to the DOJ stat, even if the numbers are small, how many people do you think it would take to commit a mass terrorist attack? Are you willing to make that call on behalf of 300 million people? Your job description is clearly spelled out in the Constitution, so would you just ignore it and continue, as Obama did, to let Muslim refugees in who may be ISIS members?
It would only take one person to commit an act of terror and stopping all of the people FLEEINNG from an arbitrary list of nations would do nothing but placate the irrational fears of non-thinking people. Even if it did stop those few terrorist that would still leave about 520 other terrorists (related activists) free to produce all the carnage. Not to mention the fact that if one were going to come here to specifically target the US with a terrorist act, one would probably be able to circumvent the ban anyways by gaining a fraudulent visa or passport from a non-banned nation (you know the same type of arguments made in regards to gun control - criminals don't follow the law).
BTW, from 2004 to 2013 a total of 36 Americans were killed in terrorist attacks inside the US (the types of attacks supposedly to be prevented by the travel ban). So yeah I would probably ignore it for the most part. It is a non-issue, other than it serves to generate fear which drives the need to continually dump untold amounts of treasure to defend against what is largely indefensible.
I won't defend Obama, other than to say you need to stop listening to talk radio and start doing some investigation yourself. I guess we aren't really doing enough unless there are thousands of American soldiers dying to protect you by taking the fight to them instead of fighting here?
I am all in favor of stringent vetting of all immigrants, regardless of where they are from, but this ban does nothing except placate the irrational fears of the loyal Fox News adherents who imagine there is a bad guy behind every shrub just waiting to steal the gold certificates they bought from the TV ad.
The War on Terror was the biggest hoax foisted on the American people since the War on Drugs. There will always be another "existential threat" to protect you from

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is online now  
post #12 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:20 AM
Member
 
VladDracul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Southeast USA
Posts: 909
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Trump did the right thing trying to protect America from weak vetting. (travelers from countries previously identified as dangerous by, I assume, experts) The ban is temporary and he needs to simply let it go and let the judge and a appellate court be held accountable if a terrorist act occurs. He's got bigger fish to fry rather than get bogged down any more in this fight.
However, I don't recollect all the jumping up and down in late 2014 when Obama placed Ebola-related travel restrictions on affected countries in west Africa to fly via US airports only with screening procedures in place

If you don't embody controversy, what you say will become just another part of the media driven culture of stifling thought and debate about issues.
VladDracul is online now  
post #13 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:34 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,953
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladDracul View Post
Trump did the right thing trying to protect America from weak vetting. (travelers from countries previously identified as dangerous by, I assume, experts) The ban is temporary and he needs to simply let it go and let the judge and a appellate court be held accountable if a terrorist act occurs. He's got bigger fish to fry rather than get bogged down any more in this fight.
However, I don't recollect all the jumping up and down in late 2014 when Obama placed Ebola-related travel restrictions on affected countries in west Africa to fly via US airports only with screening procedures in place
That is only because the shoe was on the other foot then. You didn't see "all the jumping up and down" because then it was the GOP who was doing all the jumping up and down that Obama "wasn't doing enough". Obama restricted entrance into five airports so that the passengers could be vetted, he didn't outright ban travel from those countries. So again, sort of the same, but very different. In the meantime 1 American died from Ebola, 1.

U.S. tightens travel restrictions from West Africa to curb Ebola - LA Times

At the center of every moMEnt of my life is ME!
Ynot is online now  
post #14 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:39 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: MI
Posts: 3,613
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

I really struggle with how this is unconstitutional.
A) It is a leap of faith that it is a Muslim ban.
B) I didn't think foreigners had our constitutional rights
C) It is not a permanent ban, only 90 days, as I recall.
D) If this is truly unconstitutional, then how can we deny letting in any Chinese person who wants to come here? If we deny, then they would justly cry 'racism', in as far as I know, Chinese are more racially consistent than folks in the travel banned countries are Muslim.

I feel like we have so twisted the constitution, we only use it when it really doesn't apply....
naiveonedave is offline  
post #15 of 242 (permalink) Old 02-10-2017, 07:42 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Midwest
Posts: 110
Re: 9th Court of Appeals uphold halt to temp immigrant ban

I grew up about 1 mile from that bridge in Ohio. Traverses a park - nice/beautiful area. Not exactly a "refugee" type area - upper middle class + Caucasian population. About 350 per grade at high school - I'll wager less than 10 are Muslum.
2&out is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome